Why Go to Church?

Google Image
In writing these blogs, I often ask the rhetorical question, “What’s the point?” about a specific issue. But you could ask that about the blog itself. Why write a blog called “Skeptical Faith?”

I write it because I hope to help people who have given up on God and/or religion to think through their reasons for doing so and to offer the view that there’s no conflict between skepticism and faith. I don’t assume that readers haven’t thought them through. It’s just that, in my opinion, you can’t be done with questions of faith. Honesty in the face of daily questions – assuming we’re conscious of them - requires us to keep coming back to them.

And giving up on God and giving up on religion are, obviously, related, and related to the currently popular notion that you can be “spiritual without being religious.”

Anything More Than Self-Betterment?
It’s a catchy phrase and I suppose it’s possible, but in my view, it’s unlikely. Can you really be spiritual on your own, apart from the community of believers? Can you be spiritual while ignoring the historical religious figures who "invented" spirituality and the traditions they founded? Even if you’re able to stick to them, can you be sure that your spiritual practices are anything more than exercises in self-betterment?

The idea of spiritually "going it alone" may be culturally comfortable with American individualism but it does little to help avoid self-delusion and self-centeredness. Religion is a communal anchor. It tests our spirituality against time-honored criteria and invites us to be part of a community of like-minded seekers of the spirit. 

Trying to go it alone spiritually also disconnects us from the moral authority of religion. Ah, you might say, that’s good because religion has lost its moral authority – if it ever had any.

I don’t believe that’s true. In fact, I believe much of our moral consciousness, whether we’re “spiritual” or “religious” or not, and whether or not we’re aware of it, derives from what we’ve learned from the lives, if not words, of our religious parents, grandparents and relatives.

Google Image
And religious leaders, overcoming the stains that stick to them because of wrongdoing on the part of some of their colleagues, are continuing to attempt to lead people toward love, kindness, compassion, generosity and the adoption of meaningful, God-filled lives.

Many people are uncomfortable with the religions of parents and grandparents and those religions’ moral positions. To some extent, that’s because those religions’ moral stances are sometimes contrary to the current climate of opinion, which is indifferent or hostile toward God and religion. 

But what good is a church or religion that automatically approves of the whims of contemporary culture? Is it saying anything that society isn’t already saying to itself? Shouldn’t religion make you think critically about everything in life and judge it by the standards of your faith? Should a religion change its beliefs and practice with every generation? How credible would that faith be?

Of course, the church - as the famous Protestant theologian Karl Barth said paraphrasing St. Augustine – should be “reformed but always reforming.” In the case of Christianity, that means continually asking “what Jesus meant” and trying to conform to Jesus’ leadership, no matter how slow or extended the process.

Spiritual Without Church?
So do you have to “go to church” to be spiritual or even “religious” or “Christian?” Not necessarily. A psalmist wrote:

“Where can I go from your spirit, or where can I flee from your face?
If I climb the heavens, you are there. If I lie in the grave, you are there.
If I take the wings of the dawn and dwell at the sea’s furthest end,
Even there your hand would lead me, your right hand would hold me fast.”

In my opinion, many people who fail to participate in regular religious services but insist they’re “spiritual” may be delusional. It’s like medical self-treatment or being your own lawyer or financial adviser. They’re possible, but why do so when there’s a better way?





  










Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Gospel of The Little Prince

Image
  Attention all those concerned only with “matters of great consequence:” Is it possible that you’ve become someone you didn’t want to be, having strayed far from the innocence and simplicity of childhood? That’s the main question asked in The Little Prince, which Netflix, the streaming video service, has added to its repertoire of movies and TV shows. Though not a big fan of animated flicks, I was a big fan of the book, The Little Prince, back in the 1970s when it became extremely popular in the U.S. It was first published in French and English in New York in 1943 as a novella by French aristocrat, writer, poet, and pioneering aviator Antoine de Saint-Exupery , who disappeared while piloting a Free French Army plane the following year over the Mediterranean Sea. Nearly Two Million Copies “The novella is the fourth most-translated book in the world and was voted the best book of the 20th century in France,” says Wikipedia. “Translated into more than 250 language...
Read more

‘Spiritual but Not Religious,’ Revisited

Image
Google Image I’ve expressed several times in these blogs my skepticism about declarations by some of our contemporaries that they are “spiritual but not religious.” Much of the skepticism results from the false dichotomy this entails, as if the spiritual and religious are mutually exclusive. Spirituality, after all, is the whole point of being religious. With the exception of some forms of Buddhism, all the major religions aim to bring people closer to God, who is “spiritual.” St. Paul, among the earliest leaders of Christianity, wrote that he is imparting a teaching “not taught by human wisdom but taught by the spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit.” But Daniel Horan, Franciscan priest, theologian and author, wrote in a recent edition of the National Catholic Reporter: “What if our starting point in thinking about what it means to be a person in communion with God, oneself and the world was not reduced to external expressions of institutional belo...
Read more

Clinging to Archie Bunker's God

Image
Google Image Archie Bunker, the character masterfully played by the late Carroll O’Conner in the 1970s TV comedy “All in the Family,” had his own take on the traditional Christian doctrine of the inerrancy of the Bible. “God don’t make no mistakes,” declared Archie. “That’s how he got to be God.” For those too young to remember Archie, who in 2005 was listed as number 1 on Bravo's 100 Greatest TV Characters, Wikipedia says Bunker was characterized by his bigotry towards “… blacks, Hispanics, "Commies," gays, hippies, Jews, Asians, Catholics, "women's libbers," and Polish-Americans….” Bunker was presented as a Christian, however, and “… often misquotes the Bible. He takes pride in being religious, although he rarely attends church services ….” An Anonymous Contributor Sister Mary Matilda, my eighth grade teacher, would accuse me of being uncharitable but I imagine that an anonymous contributor to a recent newspaper column is an “Archie Bunke...
Read more